Gallery: Vice President Biden Jump Starts High Speed Rail Network With ...

 

Vice President Joe Biden announced today a six year plan that will provide $53 billion to get the US high speed rail network on its feet. The plan is the first step to meeting President Barack Obama’s goal — which he stated in his State of the Union address last month — of building a high speed rail network that at least 80% of Americans will have access to by 2036. Over the next fiscal year alone, $8 billion will be spent getting our current rail system up to speed, installing a limited amount of dedicated electrified high speed track and figuring out which corridors without rail service should get it first.

Read the rest of this entry »

LEAVE A COMMENT

or your inhabitat account below



1 Comment

  1. lazyreader February 10, 2011 at 7:32 am

    If Biden lived in D.C. he’d never have to commute. If the Northeast wants its high speed rail then fine. It’s possible it might prove to be partially profitable (some Amtrak routes do profit, but many have poor ridership and are huge money pits) Then the states can pay for it (the states that the rail traverses through). In fact, let the states take over transportation funding altogether for each of their own needs. We can eliminate federal taxes on transportation and transfer it to the states. Not one federal dollar would ever pay for roads, rails, runways, or bus lanes (There would be no federal dollars). By doing that the federal government can’t stick their hands in the cookie jar. The revenues wont be tampered with it or redistributed. Maryland money wont be used to pay for New York’s roads nor Mississippi money paying for Northeast rail. They pay for what they want. Regions of states can form coalitions to deal with bridges or tunnels on their borders. The original assumption was that private companies would foot some of the bill (that never happened). The High-speed rail scheme they have in California alone is a financial Boondoggle waiting to happen. A proposal in a state that’s practically bankrupt. Pouring billions of dollars down this high-speed drain. High-speed rail is slower than flying, overall less practical than cars, and far more expensive than the two, so it won’t increase mobility or save energy or the planet. While high tech rail may seem revolutionary….so was the Concorde Jet once. Although actual planes were built and regular services maintained for years which operated at a slight profit, the income from only 20 planes they had, barely made a dent in the actual cost of the project. In this case, by the early 1970s it had already become painfully obvious that the advantages of supersonic flight were failed to compete with the lower fares made possible by slower but much more cost-effective planes. So they turned them into limousines with the best meals and wines and it served only a few very limited corridors. So high-speed rail is not going to remove cars from roads, just the few that drive from city to city, most traffic is inside the cities and towns. The idea of spending hundreds of billions on a train system, where as buses are far cheaper, planes far faster and cars more convenient; it’s ridiculous.

get the free Inhabitat newsletter

Submit this form
popular today
all time
most commented
more popular stories >
more popular stories >
more popular stories >
Federated Media Publishing - Home